


That YouTube Argument About Interpretations

by Sparky_Lurkdragon



Category: Shadow of the Colossus, Team ICO Series
Genre: Archived From Tumblr, Archived from sparkylurkdragon blog, Meta Essay, Nonfiction, Swearing
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2014-09-03
Updated: 2014-09-03
Packaged: 2019-10-08 10:17:54
Rating: Teen And Up Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 314
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/17384639
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Sparky_Lurkdragon/pseuds/Sparky_Lurkdragon
Summary: A brief musing on an argument I had with someone once on whether or not Shadow of the Colossus allows for multiple interpretations.





	That YouTube Argument About Interpretations

I remember one time I got into a YouTube argument with a person over Wander being evil or not.

No, let me back up. I once got into a YouTube argument with a person on whether or not  _Shadow of the Colossus_  allows for multiple interpretations, or whether art in general does.

Which, um. Honestly I think the answer to that is pretty obvious. Countless words have been written around tiny minute differences of opinion on what a work of art is trying to say, what the creator actually said, and what it said to an individual even if the creator didn’t actually mean to say that.

That’s part of why  _SotC_  is such a highly-praised game - the story and everyone’s relative morality is ultimately left up to each player to decide. And I wouldn’t have it any other way: yeah, I’m sympathetic to Wander and ultimately on his and Dormin’s side in all this, but other folks aren’t  _and that’s totally cool_. Literally everybody in that game is dodgy (aside from Agro, yes even Mono if you get into the theorizing about  _ICO_ ), but just which dodgy people you decide to support - even none of them! - falls to you.

There’s such a lot of power there. With  _Shadow of the Colossus_ , what you come away with depends a lot on what you bring to it.

The denouement of this is that this person was so incised that someone interpreted a videogame differently from him, a videogame that the  _creator is on record wanting players to form their own opinions about **to the point he refuses to explain what’s going on for fear of crushing players’** **creativity**_ , that he left a nasty comment on my YouTube page.

I guess stuff about gamers being shitheads about the medium being criticised, combined with a general Team ICO kick I’m on right now, made me remember it.

**Author's Note:**

> End Notes Added January 11th, 2019:  
> The "gamers being shitheads" thing was Gamergate, yes. At the time I didn't want to speak the name and call attention to myself.  
> I do not for sure know the gender of the person I was arguing with. I leave the 'he' pronouns in the interest of preserving my records.


End file.
